[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Design flaw in Rest_collision
From: |
address@hidden |
Subject: |
Re: Design flaw in Rest_collision |
Date: |
Mon, 5 Nov 2012 07:16:32 +0100 |
On 5 nov. 2012, at 06:51, address@hidden wrote:
> 1) rest->extent (common, Y_AXIS)
> 2) Rest::height
> 3) Rest::generic_extent_callback
> 4) Rest::brew_internal_stencil
> 5) Rest::glyph_name
> 6) Staff_symbol_referencer::get_position
> 7) rest->relative_coordinate (common, Y_AXIS);
> 8) Rest_collision::force_shift_callback_rest
> 9) Rest_collision::calc_positioning_done
> 10) rest->extent (common, Y_AXIS)
A better way to describe it just to wrap heads around it, with the circular
dependency underlined:
Rest extents depend on their stencil. This stencil depends on placement on/off
the staff. Placement may depend on the placement of other rests. To calculate
the placement of other rests, we need to shift all of them. The amount of
space one must shift depends on the extent of the rest.
Does anyone see a way to break it? Or am I thinking through this wrong?
Cheers,
MS
- Design flaw in Rest_collision, address@hidden, 2012/11/04
- Re: Design flaw in Rest_collision, Keith OHara, 2012/11/04
- Re: Design flaw in Rest_collision, address@hidden, 2012/11/05
- Re: Design flaw in Rest_collision,
address@hidden <=
- Re: Design flaw in Rest_collision, David Kastrup, 2012/11/05
- Re: Design flaw in Rest_collision, address@hidden, 2012/11/05
- Re: Design flaw in Rest_collision, David Kastrup, 2012/11/05
- Re: Design flaw in Rest_collision, address@hidden, 2012/11/05
- Re: Design flaw in Rest_collision, David Kastrup, 2012/11/05
- Re: Design flaw in Rest_collision, address@hidden, 2012/11/05
- Re: Design flaw in Rest_collision, David Kastrup, 2012/11/05
- Re: Design flaw in Rest_collision, address@hidden, 2012/11/05
- Re: Design flaw in Rest_collision, Werner LEMBERG, 2012/11/05
- Re: Design flaw in Rest_collision, address@hidden, 2012/11/05